1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 62,892,597 as well as KRW 60,00,000 among them, from December 22, 2017 to the day of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 28, 2012, with respect to the 1,332 square meters (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) prior to the previous Seoul-gun, the registration of creation of a mortgage was completed on December 28, 2012 with respect to the 100 million maximum debt amount, the debtor, the Defendant, and the Plaintiff as the mortgagee.

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.

The Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction of real estate in Gwangju District Court D with respect to the instant real estate based on the instant right to collateral security, and the said court rendered a decision to voluntarily commence auction on August 10, 2016.

C. The Plaintiff received dividends of KRW 32,890,417 on December 21, 2017 in the said voluntary auction procedure.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Upon the Defendant’s request that money be needed to resolve the issue of criminal complaint against the Defendant E, the Plaintiff asserted that KRW 60 million should be set at an interest rate of 12% per annum and paid KRW 60 million to E on January 2, 2013 after establishing the instant collateral security right.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above loan amounting to KRW 60 million and damages for delay.

B. On February 18, 2008, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant concluded a sales contract with E to sell the instant real estate in the amount of KRW 60 million, and completed the registration of ownership transfer thereafter on February 19, 2008, instead of completing the registration of ownership transfer, on February 19, 2008, completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage with regard to the instant real estate in the amount of KRW 120 million, the obligor, the Defendant, and the mortgagee E.

However, around December 2012, E purchased the instant real estate from E and paid KRW 60 million to E around that time, when E had cancelled the above sales contract and requested the return of the purchase price.

Afterward, the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate upon the plaintiff's request, instead of completing the registration.